Network Working Group D.Black Internet Draft EMC Corporation Document: draft-black-snmp-uri-02.txt K. McCloghrie Expires: August 2004 Cisco Systems J. Schoenwaelder International University Bremen February 2004 URI Scheme for SNMP Status of this Memo This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- Drafts. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. Abstract SNMP and the Internet-Standard Management Framework are widely used for management of communication devices, creating needs to specify SNMP access (including access to SNMP MIB object instances) from non-SNMP management environments. For example, when out-of-band IP management is used via a separate management interface (e.g., for a device that does not support in-band IP access), there is a need for a uniform way to indicate how to contact the device for management. URLs fit this need well, as they allow a single text string to indicate a management access communication endpoint for a wide variety of IP-based protocols. This document defines a simple URI scheme so that SNMP can be designated as the protocol used for management. This scheme also allows URI specification of individual MIB object instances. Black Expires - August 2004 [Page 1] URI Scheme for SNMP February 2004 Conventions used in this document The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC 2119]. Table of Contents 1. Introduction...................................................2 2. Syntax of an SNMP URI..........................................3 3. Semantics and Operations.......................................4 3.1 SNMP Service URIs..........................................4 3.2 SNMP Object URIs...........................................4 3.3 Interoperability Considerations............................6 4. Examples.......................................................7 5. Security Considerations........................................8 6. IANA Considerations............................................9 7. Change History (to be deleted prior to RFC publication)........9 8. Normative References...........................................9 9. Informative References........................................10 10. Acknowledgments..............................................10 11. Author's Addresses...........................................11 1. Introduction SNMP and the Internet-Standard Management Framework were originally devised to manage IP devices via in-band means where management access is primarily via the same interface(s) used to send and receive IP traffic. SNMP's wide adoption has resulted in its use to manage communication devices that do not support in- band IP access (e.g., Fibre Channel devices); a separate out-of- band IP interface is often used for management. URLs provide a convenient way to locate that interface and specify the protocol to be used for management; one possible scenario is for an in-band query to return a text string URL that indicates how the device is managed. This document specifies a URI scheme to permit SNMP (including a specific SNMP context) to be designated as the management protocol by such a URL. The scheme contains OPTIONAL extensions that allow a URI to refer to specific information within an SNMP MIB. Black Expires - August 2004 [Page 2] URI Scheme for SNMP February 2004 2. Syntax of an SNMP URI An SNMP URI has the following ABNF [RFC 2234] syntax: snmp_URI = "snmp:" "//" [ user "@" ] host [ ":" port ] [ ";" [engine ":"] context ] [ "/" oid [ "+" | ".*" ] ] user = < SNMP user name as specified by [RFC 3414] > host = < as specified by [RFC 2396] and [RFC 2732] > port = < as specified by [RFC 2396] > engine = "0x" hex [ (hex)* ] ; SNMP contextEngineID as specified by [RFC 3411] with a "0x" prefix hex = < Hex digit, as specified by [RFC 2396] > context = < SNMP context name as specified by [RFC 3411] > oid = < as specified by [RFC 3061] > If the user is empty or not given, the entity making use of an SNMP URI is expected to know which SNMP user name is to be used if required. In contrast to protocols such as FTP, SNMPv3 does not use passwords, hence the SNMP URI scheme does not provide syntax for passwords. If the port is empty or not given, port 161 is assumed. If the context is empty or not given, the empty string ("") is assumed, as it is the default SNMP context. An SNMP contextEngineID is a variable-format binary element that is usually discovered by an SNMP Manager. If the engine is empty or not given, the engine is to be discovered by interrogating the SNMP Agent at the specified host and port; see Section 3.1. The encoding rules specified in [RFC 2396] and [RFC 2732] apply to SNMP URIs, including the use of escape sequences introduced by the "%" character to represent reserved and non-ASCII characters. SNMP allows any UTF-8 character to be used in user name and context name strings. All UTF-8 characters other than unreserved US-ASCII characters (see [RFC 2396], Section 2.3) MUST be escaped via use of the "%" character as specified in [RFC 2396], Section 2. All bytes of every multi-byte UTF-8 character must be escaped, one byte at a time. SNMP URIs will generally be short enough to avoid implementation string length limits (e.g., that may occur at 255 characters). Use of IP addresses in SNMP URIs is acceptable in situations where dependence on availability of DNS service is undesirable or must be avoided; otherwise IP addresses should not be used (see [RFC 1900] for further explanation). Black Expires - August 2004 [Page 3] URI Scheme for SNMP February 2004 3. Semantics and Operations An SNMP URI that does not include an oid is called an SNMP service URI because it designates a communication endpoint for access to SNMP management service. An SNMP URI that includes an oid is called an SNMP object URI because it designates one or more object instances in an SNMP MIB. For a detailed overview of the documents that describe the current Internet-Standard Management Framework, please refer to section 7 of [RFC 3410]. 3.1 SNMP Service URIs An SNMP service URI does not designate a data object, but rather an interactive service that accesses an SNMP context; the telnet URI scheme [RFC 1738] is another example of using a URI to designate a service. The expected means of accessing information designated by an SNMP service URI is to use an SNMP Manager to access the SNMP context designated by the URI via the SNMP Agent at the host and port designated by the URI; if the context is empty or not given, "" (the empty string) is assumed as it is the default SNMP context. If an engine is given in the URI, the context is to be accessed via that SNMP engine. If the engine is empty or not given in the URI, the engine is to be discovered; the engine to be used is the one that supports the designated context. The engine component of the URI SHOULD be present if more than one engine at the designated host and port supports the designated context. SNMP proxy agents are the most common reason for multiple SNMP engines to exist at a single host and port; when an SNMP Agent is local to the transport endpoint that it manages, it will usually have only one engine and it is generally safe to omit the engine component of an SNMP URI when there is no SNMP proxy involved. 3.2 SNMP Object URIs An SNMP object URI contains an oid component. The URI is used by first separating the oid component (including any suffix), and processing the resulting SNMP service URI as specified in Section 3.1 to determine the SNMP context to be accessed. The engine component SHOULD be present if more than one engine at the designated host and port that supports the designated context. The oid component is then used to generate SNMP operations directed to that SNMP context. Black Expires - August 2004 [Page 4] URI Scheme for SNMP February 2004 The semantics of an SNMP object URI depend on whether the oid has a suffix and what that suffix is. There are three possibilities; in each case, the designation is within the SNMP context specified by the service URI portion of the SNMP object URI: (1) An oid without a suffix designates the MIB object instance named by that oid. (2) An oid with a "+" suffix designates the lexically next MIB object instance following that oid. (3) An oid with a ".*" suffix designates the set of MIB object instances for which that oid is a lexical prefix. When there is a choice among syntax formats to designate the same MIB object instance, the above list is in order of preference (no suffix is most preferable) as it runs from most precise to least precise. This is because an oid without a suffix precisely designates an object instance, whereas a "+" suffix designates the next object instance, which may change, and the ".*" suffix could designate multiple object instances. Use of multiple syntactically distinct URIs to designate the same MIB object instance is NOT RECOMMENDED as it may cause unexpected results in URI-based systems that use string comparison to test URIs for equality. An SNMP URI can also be used to designate a MIB object instance to be written via an SNMP Set operation; the oid MUST NOT have a suffix in this case, and the data to be written is not given within the URI. The SNMP operation or operations generated to access the data designated by an SNMP object URI depend on the oid suffix or absence thereof: (1) For an OID without a suffix, an SNMP Get operation is generated using the OID as a variable binding name. The result of URI data access is the result of the generated operation. Note that SNMP errors, and the values "noSuchObject" and "noSuchInstance" are possible results; see [RFC 3416]. (2) For an OID with a "+" suffix, an SNMP Get Next operation is generated using the OID as a variable binding name. The result of URI data access is the result of the generated operation. Note that SNMP errors and the "endOfMibView" value are possible results in this case; see [RFC 3416]. (3) For an OID with a ".*" suffix, an SNMP Get Next operation is generated using the OID as a variable binding name. If the result is an SNMP error, that error is the result of URI data access. If the resulting variable binding contains an OID for Black Expires - August 2004 [Page 5] URI Scheme for SNMP February 2004 which the original OID is not a lexical prefix, the result of URI data access is the value "noSuchObject". If the resulting variable binding contains an "endOfMibView" value, that value is the result of URI data access. In all three cases, URI data access processing is complete. Otherwise, an SNMP Get Next operation is generated using the newly returned OID as a variable binding name; this is iterated until the Get Next variable binding returns an OID for which the original OID is not a lexical prefix, or returns an "endOfMibView" value or returns an SNMP error. The result of URI data access is the set of resulting variable bindings (oids and values) that do not contain "endOfMibView" values. SNMP Get Bulk operations MAY be used to optimize case (3). A single SNMP operation MAY be used to access data for all or part of multiple SNMP URIs (e.g., via use of multiple variable bindings in a single operation). Implementations should regard use of relative object URIs (i.e., ../oid) as hints that optimization is possible, but the SNMP URI scheme does not provide any means of specifying such optimizations. When format (1) is used to specify a MIB object instance to be written, an SNMP Set operation is generated instead of a Get. Formats (2) and (3) (i.e., "+" and ".*" oid suffixes) MUST NOT be used to specify write actions; any attempt to perform a write based on these two SNMP object URI formats is an error and MUST NOT generate any SNMP Set operations. 3.3 Interoperability Considerations This document defines a transport-independent "snmp:" scheme that is intended to accommodate SNMP transports other than UDP. UDP is the default transport for access to information specified by an "snmp:" URI for backwards compatibility with existing usage, but other transports MAY be used. If more than one transport can be used (e.g., SNMP over TCP [RFC 3430] in addition to SNMP over UDP) the information or SNMP service access designated by an SNMP URI SHOULD NOT depend on which transport is used (for SNMP over TCP, this is implied by Section 2 of [RFC 3430]). An SNMP URI designates use of SNMPv3 as specified by [RFC 3416], [RFC 3417] and related documents, but older versions of SNMP MAY be used for access designated by an SNMP URI in accordance with [RFC 3584] where usage of such older versions is unavoidable. SNMP versions (e.g., v3) have been omitted from these URI schemes for forwards compatibility with any possible future successor to SNMPv3. Black Expires - August 2004 [Page 6] URI Scheme for SNMP February 2004 4. Examples snmp://snmp.example.com This example designates the default SNMP context at the SNMP Agent at UDP port 161 of host snmp.example.com . snmp://tester5@snmp.example.com:8161 This example designates the default SNMP context at the SNMP Agent at UDP port 8161 of host snmp.example.com and indicates that the SNMP user name "tester5" is to be used to access that Agent. A possible reason for use of a non-standard port is testing of a new version of SNMP Agent code. snmp://snmp.example.com;bridge1 This example designates the "bridge1" SNMP context at snmp.example.com. Because the engine component of the URI is omitted, there SHOULD be at most one SNMP context engine at snmp.example.com that supports the "bridge1" context. snmp://snmp.example.com;0x800002b804616263:bridge1 This also designates the "bridge1" context at snmp.example.com via the SNMP contextEngineID 0x800002b804616263. This avoids ambiguity if some other context engine also supports a "bridge1" context. The above two examples are based on the figure in Section 3.3 of [RFC 3411]. snmp://snmp.example.com/1.3.6.1.2.1.1.3.0 snmp://snmp.example.com/1.3.6.1.2.1.1.3+ snmp://snmp.example.com/1.3.6.1.2.1.1.3.* These three examples all designate the sysUpTime.0 object instance in the SNMPv2-MIB for the default SNMP context ("") at snmp.example.com as sysUpTime.0 is: a) designated directly by oid 1.3.6.1.2.1.1.3.0, b) the lexically next MIB object instance after the oid 1.3.6.1.2.1.1.3, and c) the only MIB object instance whose oid has 1.3.6.1.2.1.1.3 as a lexical prefix. These three examples are provided for illustrative purposes only, as use of multiple syntactically distinct URIs to designate the same MIB object instance is NOT RECOMMENDED because it may cause unexpected results in URI-based systems that use string comparison to test URIs for equality. Black Expires - August 2004 [Page 7] URI Scheme for SNMP February 2004 snmp://snmp.example.com/1.3.6.1.2.1.2.2.1.8.* This example designates the ifOperStatus column of the IF-MIB in the default SNMP context at snmp.example.com. 5. Security Considerations An intended use of this URI scheme is designation of the location of management access to communication devices. Such location information may be considered sensitive in some environments, making it important to control even read access to that information and possibly even to encrypt it when sending it over the network. All uses of this URI scheme should provide security mechanisms appropriate to the environments in which such uses are likely to be deployed. There are management objects defined in SNMP MIBs whose MAX-ACCESS is read-write and/or read-create. Such objects may be considered sensitive or vulnerable in some network environments. The support for SNMP SET operations in a non-secure environment without proper protection can have a negative effect on network operations. The individual MIB module specifications, and especially their security considerations, should be consulted for further information. Some readable objects in some MIB modules (i.e., objects with a MAX-ACCESS other than not-accessible) may be considered sensitive or vulnerable in some network environments. It is thus important to control even GET and/or NOTIFY access to these objects and possibly to even encrypt the values of these objects when sending them over the network via SNMP. The individual MIB module specifications, and especially their security considerations, should be consulted for further information. This consideration also applies to readable objects for which read operations have side effects. SNMP versions prior to SNMPv3 did not include adequate security. Even if the network itself is secure (for example via use of IPsec), there is no control over who on the secure network is allowed to access and GET/SET (read/change/create/delete) the objects in MIB modules. It is RECOMMENDED that implementers consider the security features as provided by the SNMPv3 framework (see [RFC 3410], section 8 for an overview), including full support for SNMPv3 cryptographic mechanisms (for authentication and privacy). This is of additional importance for MIB elements considered sensitive or vulnerable because GETs have side effects. Further, deployment of SNMP versions prior to SNMPv3 is NOT RECOMMENDED. Instead, it is RECOMMENDED to deploy SNMPv3 and to Black Expires - August 2004 [Page 8] URI Scheme for SNMP February 2004 enable cryptographic security. It is then a customer/operator responsibility to ensure that the SNMP entity giving access to a MIB module instance is properly configured to give access to the objects only to those principals (users) that have legitimate rights to indeed GET or SET (change/create/delete) them. 6. IANA Considerations The IANA is asked to register the URL registration template found in Appendix A in accordance with [RFC 2717]. 7. Change History (to be deleted prior to RFC publication) -00: Initial version, user, host and port only. -01: Initial attempt to add engine, context, and oid, plus support for alternate (non-UDP) transports. -02: Reworked engine, context, and oid syntax. Made URI scheme transport-independent. Added more examples. Significant text editing and rearrangement. 8. Normative References [RFC 2119] Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels. S. Bradner. RFC 2119, BCP 14. March 1997. [RFC 2234] Augmented BNF for Syntax Specifications: ABNF. D. Crocker, Ed., P. Overell. RFC 2234. November 1997. [RFC 2396] Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI): Generic Syntax. T. Berners-Lee, R. Fielding, L. Masinter. RFC 2396. August 1998. [RFC 2732] Format for Literal IPv6 Addresses in URL's. R. Hinden, B. Carpenter, L. Masinter. RFC 2732. December 1999. [RFC 3061] A URN Namespace of Object Identifiers. M. Mealling. February 2001. [RFC 3411] An Architecture for Describing Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP) Management Frameworks. D. Harrington, R. Presuhn, B. Wijnen. December 2002. [RFC 3414] User-based Security Model (USM) for version 3 of the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMPv3). U. Blumenthal, B. Wijnen. RFC 3414. December 2002. [RFC 3416] Version 2 of the Protocol Operations for the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP). R. Presuhn, Ed. Black Expires - August 2004 [Page 9] URI Scheme for SNMP February 2004 RFC 3416. December 2002. [RFC 3417] Transport Mappings for the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP). R. Presuhn, Ed. RFC 3417. December 2002. [RFC 3584] Coexistence between Version 1, Version 2, and Version 3 of the Internet-standard Network Management Framework. R. Frye, D. Levi, S. Routhier, B. Wijnen. RFC 3584. August 2003. 9. Informative References [RFC 1738] Uniform Resource Locators (URL). T. Berners-Lee, L. Masinter, M. McCahill. RFC 1738. December 1994. [RFC 1900] Renumbering Needs Work. B. Carpenter, Y. Rekhter. RFC 1900. February 1996. [RFC 2026] The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 3. S. Bradner. RFC 2026, BCP 9. October 1996. [RFC 2717] Registration Procedures for URL Scheme Names. R. Petke, I. King. RFC 2717. November 1999. [RFC 3410] Introduction and Applicability Statements for Internet- Standard Management Framework. J. Case, R. Mundy, D. Partain, B. Stewart. RFC 3410. December 2002. [RFC 3430] Simple Network Management Protocol Over Transmission Control Protocol Transport Mapping. J. Schoenwaelder. December 2002. [RFC 3617] Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) Scheme and Applicability Statement for the Trivial File Transfer Protocol (TFTP). E. Lear. October 2003. 10. Acknowledgments Significant portions of this draft were adapted from Eliot Lear's TFTP URI scheme specification [RFC 3617]. The security considerations text was adapted from the widely used security considerations "boilerplate" for MIB modules. Comments from Ted Hardie, Michael Mealing, and Larry Masinter on earlier versions of this draft have resulted in significant improvements and are gratefully acknowledged. Black Expires - August 2004 [Page 10] URI Scheme for SNMP February 2004 11. Author's Addresses David L. Black EMC Corporation 176 South Street Hopkinton, MA 01748 Phone: +1 (508) 293-7953 Email: black_david@emc.com Keith McCloghrie Cisco Systems, Inc. 170 West Tasman Drive San Jose, CA USA 95134 Phone: +1 (408) 526-5260 Email: kzm@cisco.com Juergen Schoenwaelder International University Bremen P.O. Box 750 561 28725 Bremen Germany Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Email: j.schoenwaelder@iu-bremen.de Appendix A. Registration Template URL scheme name: snmp URL scheme syntax: Section 2 Character encoding considerations: Section 2 Intended usage: Section 1 Applications and/or protocols which use this scheme: SNMP, all versions, see [RFC 3410] and [RFC 3584] Interoperability considerations: Section 3.3 Security considerations: Section 5 Relevant publications: See [RFC 3410] for list Contact: David L. Black, Section 11 Author/Change Controller: IESG Black Expires - August 2004 [Page 11]